Cops murder 68 year old veteran in his own home - Page 4
Forum Index > Closed |
Lorken
New Zealand804 Posts
| ||
Vindicare605
United States15614 Posts
How on earth does a guy like that even get a badge? You have to do extremely rigid background checks around here for LAPD in order to even be accepted into the academy. I guess it isn't so everywhere else. | ||
Art_of_Kill
Zaire1232 Posts
| ||
Chilling5pr33
Germany518 Posts
On April 06 2012 09:10 Vindicare605 wrote: Sick. Just sick. How on earth does a guy like that even get a badge? You have to do extremely rigid background checks around here for LAPD in order to even be accepted into the academy. I guess it isn't so everywhere else. He was not alone. | ||
Jonoman92
United States9090 Posts
On April 06 2012 06:19 Kojak21 wrote: What a sensationalized title From the article I'd say the title is pretty accurate. Though whether or not the article is accurate who knows. I've generally had good experiences with cops but I guess some of them are power-obsessed psychos... | ||
xUnSeEnx
United States183 Posts
On April 06 2012 06:17 awesomoecalypse wrote: http://boingboing.net/2012/04/03/black-marine-veteran-68-shot.html For all the talk about Trayvon Martin, this story may well be even more horrific. also http://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/5/exclusive_cop_in_fatal_shooting_of The guy pulls bullshit like that, they let him back out on the street with a gun and a badge, he straight up murders an innocent old man, and he's still on duty??? There are no words. I am a criminal justice student (almost done with my bachelors and working on my masters soon) and I honestly cannot stand some of these cops out in, pardon me, butt-f*** new york, etc. (50-state-wise) A lot of the standards for hiring these cops are extremely low, with that said, a long with these areas the cops are not really "watched" as much as cops in the northern Virginia area and areas closer to the capital of the United States, therefore generally speaking, the cops are hired without bachelors, grand-fathered in more, or the department has next-to-no standards for professionalism. I will tell you if any of this happened near the capital (D.C.) they would have been sued and fired. The issue is, now it brings up questions for White Plains, NY. The question is, are the standards too low for cops staying employed and what are their policies in the department regarding the use of force, etc. I will tell you, with the attention this has gained, the cop probably will not be with the department any longer if the department has any decency or respect. Source: I know about this stuff through research and studying, also, I talk to professionals all the time about these issues that are brought up. Closing: If anyone has any questions or needs maybe a better explanation, please do not hesitate to contact me via PM, I would be happy to give more insight / opinions. | ||
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On April 06 2012 09:07 Lorken wrote: That's probably the reason why police aren't allowed to carry guns here. Also, don't they test people before becoming cops so they don't do shit like this? Yea I would never want to live in a place where cops had no guns. That aside there are tests but how rigid it is depends on the location. Not all police departments are the same unfortunately. The ones with high standards are basically the ones in major metropolitan areas. Los Angeles, New York, Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Miami...places like that are NOTORIOUSLY difficult to get hired at because of how ridiculously stringent their hiring process is. You also tend to see far less corruption there Per Capita than in your small podunk towns that don't have the same stringent process on hiring. The process I had to go through alone was by itself a six month progress. I took at least three tests, several psycological exams, IQ tests, aptitude tests, and several lie detector tests. Then came the academy which was akin to boot camp for nine months. I don't understand why someone would go through all of that, land a nice stable job, and then piss it all away doing something illegal. I never understood it. This isn't to say that all small town police officers are bad...it's just that they have a higher chance of it. It is not uncommon for an officer there to have been fired/laid off/not make the cut (for a good reason more often than not)in one of the bigger city police forces. | ||
Nibbler89
884 Posts
On April 06 2012 08:59 Jayme wrote: Er nope. Well at least most of the good cops don't. I can tell you from personal experience that nothing pisses the good cops off more than bad ones that do stupid shit because it gives all of us a bad name. Now the good ones have to deal with the fall out because the city has a terrible system for identifying people who just shouldn't be cops and a lot of people refuse to look at each cop as a single individual. Police are tight nit and generally are that way because they deal with dangerous situations on a daily basis. That being said, most of the cops I know won't tolerate bullshit from the others when it's completely illegal. We are supposed to be held to higher standards after all. As for turning off the recording devices...if the cop can turn them off it's poorly implemented. I know I can't turn off the one in my car if I wanted to and I am not technologically inept. If you are supposed to be held to a higher standard why don't you actively try to change or try to remove the one's who do not fit in the "most" category with your fellow good cops, they are exactly the cops that let this type of thing happen no? That's the problem when it's only "most" won't tolerate completely illegal bullshit. So then an amount do tolerate somewhat illegal bullshit which is usually how these situations start. Somewhat illegal bullshit is tolerated, and then the civilian victims are put into a difficult situation which often leads to completely illegal bullshit happening. You also get a situation where the good cops won't tolerate "completely illegal bullshit" but will tolerate the mediocre cops who do somewhat illegal bullshit. Then mediocre cops that do somewhat illegal bullshit tolerate the really bad ones who do completely illegal bullshit, then the "good" cops can't call out the really bad cops without also calling out the mediocre cops for tolerating the really bad ones. Sorry this the above is kinda convoluted but hopefully you get my point. I guess then the problem is good cops who don't see a problem, or do you really think it's just specific departments? Just seems weird that there's rarely ever cops stepping up to testify against other cops in these situations and I think it's because of the situation I described earlier. I'm sure at least one person at the event feels guilty and if they could would tell the truth about what happened, but since some will cover for others they can't really without screwing over everyone else. If you can give some examples of police brutality where one of the cops stepped up and testified against the others I'd be happy to change my outlook. If the majority are good cops and hate this type of shit how come every time it happens they instantly try to deny responsibility instead of trying to remove the bad apples who give them a bad name. They get a bad name because they don't do enough to remove or punish bad apples not because bad apples exist. I also have a hypothetical that i'm genuinely curious about asking you, I'm sure you consider yourself to be a good cop so, what would you do if you were put into a situation where you are with 5 other fellow officers and you see 2 of them beating a defenseless man who did not resist and the other 3 looking away. It turns out the man is innocent and isn't the one they were looking for but he has been beaten and tazed to death. the 2 who assaulted him decide to make up that it looked like he reached for a gun and resisted arrest, the other three agree to go along with the story. They then turn to you and ask "you're going to go along with this story too right?" What would you do(at the moment and later on)? Is there anything you even could do? Would you be willing to testify against them and how do you think your co-workers / department would look at you if all 5 officers lost their jobs / faced jail time afterwards. What do you realistically think their punishments would be?What are the odds your word will be believed over theirs? I realize this is a very extreme / unrealistic hypothetical and that will probably your first reaction is to say "well that would never happen" if you can come up with a more realistic , but similar scenario that you think an officer probably has been put in before that'd be great too. Maybe in your area this would never happen so feel free to imagine you are in a different area where it feasibly could as well. Just wanted to say I personally have had no bad experiences with cops never even been stopped, I just think it seems very dangerous how these people can get away with stuff like this. | ||
sevencck
Canada691 Posts
On April 06 2012 06:21 dAPhREAk wrote: so, what exactly is there to discuss about this case? the DA is holding a grand jury. Not much to discuss perhaps, but we're fortunate to live in the electronic age, where people can be quickly informed about events like this. It's important for people to have an unbiased understanding of what is happening in our society. Regardless of what many people choose to believe in their unbridled reverence for authority, there are too many unworthy officers working for police forces all over North America, and it's important for people to be made aware when they step (way) out of line. Thanks for posting OP. | ||
ziggurat
Canada847 Posts
On April 06 2012 07:47 dAPhREAk wrote: yeah, because (1) we arent in a recession and can barely afford to pay for cops; and (2) people dont love to complain about a police state where everything is recorded. There is a move towards this in a lot of jurisdictions. Many police cars have videocameras that record everything that happens in front of them and in the back seat. Also, many police forces equip officers with shoulder mics that record everything. The video recording by a camera on a helmet or a shoulder doesn't work very well because it's incredibly jerky and you can't see shit, but they are working on making it better. It's true that it costs money. But good cops recognize that it protect them as well as others. Cops have to deal with tons of bullshit accusations that they beat someone up or whatever, so having a video of their behaviour should be a good thing. I think officers are a bit intimidated about recording because they have to make snap decisions in dangerous situations and then see a judge or a review board spend weeks dissecting what they did in a courtroom a year later -- which can be pretty unfair. But that's the way things are going, like it or not. I haven't formed any opinion about the case in the OP, but I work with a lot of police officers and I see the technology that they're putting into effect in Calgary. It costs a lot of money and it takes a lot of time to implement, but I think at least here police agree that it's better to have everything recorded. | ||
logikly
United States329 Posts
| ||
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On April 06 2012 09:51 Nibbler89 wrote: If you are supposed to be held to a higher standard why don't you actively try to change or try to remove the one's who do not fit in the "most" category with your fellow good cops, they are exactly the cops that let this type of thing happen no? That's the problem when it's only "most" won't tolerate completely illegal bullshit. So then an amount do tolerate somewhat illegal bullshit which is usually how these situations start. Somewhat illegal bullshit is tolerated, and then the civilian victims are put into a difficult situation which often leads to completely illegal bullshit happening. You also get a situation where the good cops won't tolerate "completely illegal bullshit" but will tolerate the mediocre cops who do somewhat illegal bullshit. Then mediocre cops that tolerate somewhat illegal bullshit tolerate the really bad ones who do completely illegal bullshit, then the "good" cops can't call out the really bad cops without also calling out the mediocre cops for tolerating the really bad ones. Sorry this the above is kinda convoluted but hopefully you get my point. I guess then the problem is good cops who don't see a problem, or do you really think it's just specific departments? Just seems weird that there's rarely ever cops stepping up to testify against other cops in these situations and I think it's because of the situation I described earlier. I'm sure at least one person at the event feels guilty and if they could would tell the truth about what happened, but since some will cover for others they can't really without screwing over everyone else. If you can give some examples of police brutality where one of the cops stepped up and testified against the others I'd be happy to change my outlook. If the majority are good cops and hate this type of shit how come every time it happens they instantly try to deny responsibility instead of trying to remove the bad apples who give them a bad name. They get a bad name because they don't do enough to remove or punish bad apples not because bad apples exist. I also have a hypothetical that i'm genuinely curious about asking you, I'm sure you consider yourself to be a good cop so, what would you do if you were put into a situation where you are with 5 other fellow officers and you see 2 of them beating a defenseless man who did not resist and the other 3 looking away. It turns out the man is innocent and isn't the one they were looking for but he has been beaten and tazed to death. the 2 who assaulted him decide to make up that it looked like he reached for a gun and resisted arrest, the other three agree to go along with the story. They then turn to you and ask "you're going to go along with this story too right?" What would you do? Is there anything you even could do? Would you be willing to testify against them and how do you think your co-workers / department would look at you if all 5 officers lost their jobs / faced jail time afterwards. What do you realistically think their punishments would be? I realize this is a very extreme / unrealistic hypothetical and that will probably your first reaction is to say "well that would never happen" if you can come up with a more realistic , but similar scenario you'd rather answer to that's fine too. You know when I read over my post I saw the "completely illegal bullshit" part and I kinda figured someone would jump on it as some sort of code that people tend to let the not so illegal shit go by. Well that's not what I meant. As much as i'd actively like to purge the police department of all horrible cops I can't actually do that. It... doesn't work that way. I have seen exactly ONE ILLEGAL thing occur in my three years so far as a police officer that was committed by another Officer. He was summarily fired and is doing who knows what right now...and yes I did testify if that matters. Do you know how often Police get complained on for every little thing? Every single time a citizen complains on an Officer it gets investigated in this department. Everything from something inane like "rudeness" to serious issues like sexual harassment. Again people get called out on a regular basis in this department so I'm not sure where you're going. The cops are taught from the get go what's acceptable behavior and what isn't acceptable behavior and that's really it. Nothing in this world is black and white and this goes for it too. If there is actually something that appears that cops are covering for one another there is very likely more to it than the media portrays...and if there isn't the cops are already in jail. The reason it's big news whenever a cop "slides" is because people jump over that shit like rabid dogs. It is always important to evaluate a situation in its TOTALITY before making any rash judgements. I can honestly tell you that I don't know what the hell happened with this case. With the information we have from the media it's clear the cops were in the wrong. Is that the whole story though? While there is never an excuse to call anyone the n-word that does not equate to the reason the man was shot. Why was he shot? Did he have a weapon? Was he not cooperating? From the outside what you should be thinking is clear...but we don't have the whole story. The chances are relatively high that there is more to this than just a cop breaking into a house and killing a man because he's black. The cop is likely a whack job because he has a history and all but this just seems so...there just seems to be parts missing. What the fuck is the motive? As for your extreme hypothetical situation...I would fucking testify in a heartbeat. In fact, I have already done so for an offense that was far less than murder. My job, my oath, and my life in general is worth more to me than protecting other police officers that are doing something completely wrong. If they tazed the guy and killed him for no reason I'm going to say exactly what happened. I'm also fairly certain that you'll find it far more difficult than you expect that an event occurs where FIVE officers just "look the other way." No...in custody deaths are heavily investigated and aside from that I have ethics...If a man was killed for no reason I will say something. As for the reaction from my co-workers? I'm actually confident I wouldn't be ostracized. There is already a full investigation underway regardless and people aren't going to think less of you because you outed a coworker that MURDERED someone. Even if by some freak of circumstances I was fired for it I would not have an issue with it. I have to sleep at night...I have a wife...I have a daughter. They are more important than anything else in the world to me. That's it. There is a thin blue line...but I assure you that it is not indestructable. | ||
Rebel_lion
United States271 Posts
Much like NCO's in the Army. If its one on one you know you can't get dicked around, but if its one on two or more, well they will all agree on what you said/did without truth being a part of it. | ||
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
| ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12396 Posts
On April 06 2012 10:07 sevencck wrote: Not much to discuss perhaps, but we're fortunate to live in the electronic age, where people can be quickly informed about events like this. It's important for people to have an unbiased understanding of what is happening in our society. Regardless of what many people choose to believe in their unbridled reverence for authority, there are too many unworthy officers working for police forces all over North America, and it's important for people to be made aware when they step (way) out of line. Thanks for posting OP. you say we should have an "unbiased understanding." the op does not give us that. it doesnt really give us anything. we dont know what happened. we dont know the officer's side of the story; we havent seen (or read an article summarizing) the evidence; we know jackshit. yet, people are jumping to conclusions about the police officers involved being murderers. | ||
Rice
United States1332 Posts
On April 06 2012 10:31 Silidons wrote: cops never lose court cases. sad. I tend to agree that this is a horrible case, but you do realize you're not likely to hear about the obvious injustice cases, because they dont make interesting news stories. I'm sure there are plenty of cases like this where the cop just gets fired/imprisoned and we NEVER hear about it. | ||
Mohdoo
United States15081 Posts
On April 06 2012 10:44 Rice wrote: I tend to agree that this is a horrible case, but you do realize you're not likely to hear about the obvious injustice cases, because they dont make interesting news stories. I'm sure there are plenty of cases like this where the cop just gets fired/imprisoned and we NEVER hear about it. You'd assume so, but why would there be so many cases where that doesn't happen? It seems bizarre that both could happen. One where he goes to prison and another where they get paid vacation. | ||
bebe01
Korea (South)512 Posts
| ||
Voltaire
United States1485 Posts
| ||
docvoc
United States5491 Posts
| ||
| ||